Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

MoonUnit75

Tell me how wrote: »

I've always said that Barack Obama must have been the cleanest candidate ever given the only thing they could accuse him with was the fake rumour that he wasn't born in the country.

Because, I have no doubt, more resources would have been thrown at finding something about him to cast doubt on him than anyone else.

Yes, I think he's an outlier over the last few decades. Personally I think he was a fantastic president and a natural leader. He's probably the only candidate since Bill Clinton to have real charisma and at least a ring of sincerity about him. The Democrats struck gold there, compared to people like John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden he just makes them look dull and insipid.

I have this nagging theory that the US is so fractured they just long for someone with major charisma who makes it seem like they are taking the country somewhere, they don't like indecisive, fudging people pleasers. It's unfortunate that Trump has that kind of charisma for a lot of people, it's the only feature that could recommend him, and even then for something like Governor at most. Another Schwarzenegger maybe.

Cody montana

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

We'll see after the hearings. This isn't going to go away.

Yeah, it will have the same outcome as all the other investigations and hearings.
Zero results.

Timberrrrrrrr

circular flexing wrote: »

Well he also wore that tan suit one time. Fox News was particularly apocalyptic about that.

And didn't he once put dijon mustard on a burger?

The man's a pure monster.

MoonUnit75

circular flexing wrote: »

I think you are vastly overestimating the impact of this "story".

Look, people are acting like this thread alone is going to decide the presidential election. I'm just discussing this scandal as an outsider, I live in Ireland and really don't picture picking a side here as having any implications other than a bit of entertainment as a spectator.

Maybe it won't affect the election, but from my own perspective, this does seem legitimate and will be at the very least a major headache for Biden for a long while yet.

Cody montana

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And didn't he once put dijon mustard on a burger?

The man's a pure monster.

In fairness, that is abhorrent.

Graham

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

from my own perspective, this does seem legitimate

I think you mentioned that already.

It's like a one man crusade to convince everyone else that it's real.

Pa ElGrande

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjEOFqJWjsA

Talks about legal issues and some context. Discussion on Hunter Bidens laptop starts 11 minutes 30 seconds to 1:15 minutes goes into the censorship, followed by court decisions around the elections.

Quin_Dub

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjEOFqJWjsA

Talks about legal issues and some context. Discussion on Hunter Bidens laptop starts 11 minutes 30 seconds to 1:15 minutes goes into the censorship, followed by court decisions around the elections.

You think people are going to watch over an hour of some randomer on Youtube?

Any chance of a summary?

Any comments or opinions from you on the content?

MoonUnit75

Graham wrote: »

I think you mentioned that already.

It's like a one man crusade to convince everyone else that it's real.

In fairness, it's more like an echo chamber here where Biden the saviour simply couldn't be tainted by shady dealings. It reminds me of 'You can't be saying that about a priest' from the 70s and 80s.

Tell me how

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjEOFqJWjsA

Talks about legal issues and some context. Discussion on Hunter Bidens laptop starts 11 minutes 30 seconds to 1:15 minutes goes into the censorship, followed by court decisions around the elections.

You seem to post very long contenta lot without clarifying why you think it is relevant.

Have you watched all 2 hours + of this video yourself?

What specifically was of interest to you? Did you agree or disagree with the points being made and what was the most significant point you think we should pay attention to?

salmocab

Echo chamber in general use these days means I disagree with the majority of people here so I’ll throw an insult that suggests a bit of a conspiracy.

MoonUnit75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

You think people are going to watch over an hour of some randomer on Youtube?

Any chance of a summary?

Any comments or opinions from you on the content?

Well it does answer one question, the Beau Biden Foundation HQ is apparently 12 minutes from the repair shop that took in the laptops.

MoonUnit75

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

In fairness, it's more like an echo chamber here where Biden the saviour simply couldn't be tainted by shady dealings. It reminds me of 'You can't be saying that about a priest' from the 70s and 80s.

The problem is, you're treating some poorly source information that hasn't even faced some basic verification as true. There is no indication of it being true.

MoonUnit75

salmocab wrote: »

Echo chamber in general use these days means I disagree with the majority of people here so I’ll throw an insult that suggests a bit of a conspiracy.

I'm not in the least suggesting a conspiracy, a conspiracy would suggest that I think people here aren't actually being sincere in their faith in Joe. I think they are sincere and that makes them discount out of hand any suggestion that he may be involved in wrong doing over a very long period of time.

MoonUnit75

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem is, you're treating some poorly source information that hasn't even faced some basic verification as true. There is no indication of it being true.

In fairness the incriminating and highly personal photos lend a lot of credence and as someone suggested above, it could even turn out to be an iCloud hack. Either way it's far more likely to be true than a spectacular and easily proved false hoax that the FBI have had custody of for a year. The lack of any statement declaring it to be false information is another element that suggest it is far more likely to be legit.

salmocab

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I'm not in the least suggesting a conspiracy, a conspiracy would suggest that I think people here aren't actually being sincere in their faith in Joe. I think they are sincere and that makes them discount out of hand any suggestion that he may be involved in wrong doing over a very long period of time.

Still though echo chamber is generally thrown out as an insult to the majority by someone who disagrees with them. Somebody else did the exact same the other day in this thread. It’s become meaningless in places like this.

MoonUnit75

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

In fairness the incriminating and highly personal photos lend a lot of credence and as someone suggested above, it could even turn out to be an iCloud hack. Either way it's far more likely to be true than a spectacular and easily proved false hoax that the FBI have had custody of for a year.

They don't lend credence though, it's a well known strategy of the Russians and likes to leak real material peppered with salacious content. The fact that Giuliani is unwilling to let them be verified indicates that they're not likely to be particularly credible. Proof of the emails being real would be a smoking gun but clearly, they do not want any any data forensics on them.

Graham

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem is, you're treating some poorly source information that hasn't even faced some basic verification as true. There is no indication of it being true.

It's quite effective at completely stopping discussion of the Trump/Biden campaign though.

MoonUnit75

Deleted User wrote: »

They don't lend credence though, it's a well known strategy of the Russians and likes to leak real material peppered with salacious content. The fact that Giuliani is unwilling to let them be verified indicates that they're not likely to be particularly credible. Proof of the emails being real would be a smoking gun but clearly, they do not want any any data forensics on them.

The congressional committee have asked the FBI to investigate if their data is the same as the New York Post data, and why it wasn't brought forward before.

I suspect the New York Post probably paid this guy a fair bit for this data and are going to get as many headlines as possible before they release the entire data dump to everyone else. That's dirty capitalism for you. I heard Giuliani saying they can come and inspect it with him if they want.

MoonUnit75

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

The congressional committee have asked the FBI to investigate if their data is the same as the New York Post data, and why it wasn't brought forward before.

I suspect the New York Post probably paid this guy a fair bit for this data and are going to get as many headlines as possible before they release the entire data dump to everyone else. That's dirty capitalism for you. I heard Giuliani saying they can come and inspect it with him if they want.

They don't have to release all the emails, even the one that they've so far only shown screenshots of would be enough to verify. Giuliani limiting access is more telling of them not wanting a proper analysis. Also there's still no indication that these have been in the possession of the FBI...

Tell me how

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I'm not in the least suggesting a conspiracy, a conspiracy would suggest that I think people here aren't actually being sincere in their faith in Joe. I think they are sincere and that makes them discount out of hand any suggestion that he may be involved in wrong doing over a very long period of time.

I can't speak for anyone else, but here is my take on it.

I suspect that it is very possible that Hunter Biden would have facilitated people meeting his dad while Joe was VP. That type of meet and greet happens worldwide in every society. It is networking, making contacts and so on.

Does that mean something illegal happened? Absolutely not.

We have had 4 years of watching Trump fail in his role as President. Many of us were very vocal as to his unsuitability for the role 4 years ago and again, speaking for myself, I take no pleasure in just how accurate I was in saying his style and personality were entirely unsuitable for the role.

Outside of this personal incompetence, we have seen entirely regressive acts such as pulling the US out of the Paris Accord, pulling out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, emboldening Kim Jong-Un, cow-towing to Putin and Saudi Arabia, undermining the WHO (during a pandemic) and generally sowing distrust and selfishness on the international stage. And as for Covid. More Americans have died from it than have died as a consequence of war and terrorism since WWII and we have seen the commander in chief get the disease and be hospitalised by it and to continue to undermine the severity of it which will lead to more Americans dying.

This pathetic insistence on here of some who claim 'to not be fans of Trumps' while demanding people engage in undermining Biden's suitability for the role is wearing thin. I'm not buying it.
Practically demanding people focus on this would be like ignoring one child stealing the family car and going out drinking at night to talk about how the other child didn't finish their vegetables.

Graham

Tell me how wrote: »

We have had 4 years of watching Trump fail in his role as President. Many of us were very vocal as to his unsuitability for the role 4 years ago and again, speaking for myself, I take no pleasure in just how accurate I was in saying his style and personality were entirely unsuitable for the role.

Outside of this personal incompetence, we have seen entirely regressive acts such as pulling the US out of the Paris Accord, pulling out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, emboldening Kim Jong-Un, cow-towing to Putin and Saudi Arabia, undermining the WHO (during a pandemic) and generally sowing distrust and selfishness on the international stage.

I think that sums it up pretty well TMH.

Tell me how wrote: »

This pathetic insistence on here of some who claim 'to not be fans of Trumps' while demanding people engage in undermining Biden's suitability for the role is wearing thin. I'm not buying it.

+1

cnocbui

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

In fairness the incriminating and highly personal photos lend a lot of credence and as someone suggested above, it could even turn out to be an iCloud hack. Either way it's far more likely to be true than a spectacular and easily proved false hoax that the FBI have had custody of for a year. The lack of any statement declaring it to be false information is another element that suggest it is far more likely to be legit.

When the FBI won't even confirm or deny in response to a US senator's enquiry, as per their policy to not comment on matters they are looking into, the lack of any statement from the FBI puts no slant on it whatsover. Your assertion that it does, and the direction you claim that slant to be in, just demonstrates your preferred bias, not any underlying truth.

Quin_Dub

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

The congressional committee have asked the FBI to investigate if their data is the same as the New York Post data, and why it wasn't brought forward before.

I suspect the New York Post probably paid this guy a fair bit for this data and are going to get as many headlines as possible before they release the entire data dump to everyone else. That's dirty capitalism for you. I heard Giuliani saying they can come and inspect it with him if they want.

The New York Post didn't pay anybody anything.

Rudi gave them the story after others refused to touch it.

Rudi might have given the repair shop guy some money , but that's not clear.

ohnonotgmail

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

There was an idiot who tweeted that the external hard drive warranty expiration date meant it wasn’t made until after Biden dropped off the laptop. It was in the thread in the politics forum and people there tried to argue that warranty starts the day the drive is made, not the date it is purchased or registered. Hunter or the store owner bought an external drive to move the recovered data to.

Then there’s the genius in the previous tweet posted here who says that because Biden lived in California he couldn’t have been in his hometown at the same time :pac:

actually I posted that on this thread. are you calling me an idiot?

MoonUnit75

Tell me how wrote: »

I can't speak for anyone else, but here is my take on it.

I suspect that it is very possible that Hunter Biden would have facilitated people meeting his dad while Joe was VP. That type of meet and greet happens worldwide in every society. It is networking, making contacts and so on.

Does that mean something illegal happened? Absolutely not.

We have had 4 years of watching Trump fail in his role as President. Many of us were very vocal as to his unsuitability for the role 4 years ago and again, speaking for myself, I take no pleasure in just how accurate I was in saying his style and personality were entirely unsuitable for the role.

Outside of this personal incompetence, we have seen entirely regressive acts such as pulling the US out of the Paris Accord, pulling out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, emboldening Kim Jong-Un, cow-towing to Putin and Saudi Arabia, undermining the WHO (during a pandemic) and generally sowing distrust and selfishness on the international stage. And as for Covid. More Americans have died from it than have died as a consequence of war and terrorism since WWII and we have seen the commander in chief get the disease and be hospitalised by it and to continue to undermine the severity of it which will lead to more Americans dying.

This pathetic insistence on here of some who claim 'to not be fans of Trumps' while demanding people engage in undermining Biden's suitability for the role is wearing thin. I'm not buying it.
Practically demanding people focus on this would be like ignoring one child stealing the family car and going out drinking at night to talk about how the other child didn't finish their vegetables.

I don't disagree with most of what you are saying, but you could also argue that Trump was given a mandate for what you consider regressive. That doesn't mean it's what the electorate who voted for him didn't forsee before they elected him. Everyone was told he was a clown, running as joke or as revenge for Obama taking the piss out of him. Even the Republican party were saying that. People knew what they were getting, maybe more than in any other presidential election.

Now, my own take on it is that Biden has been doing back room deals for so long that he has too many skeletons in the closet. Having his son on the board of a known corrupt gas company owned by a corrupt oligarch in exile, whose assets were frozen in a major fraud investigation in the UK at the time is either extremely, incompetently poor judgement. Or, they have something major on him. There's no way he can get a prosecutor in a foreign jurisdiction fired and not order his own son to leave a position that makes him look extremely compromised himself.

Either way, he's an uncharasmatic, compromised figure and whether I am interested in the scandal surrounding him on here or not is of zero consequence. So I won't be taking my five hail mary's and ten our father's for discussing it.

ohnonotgmail

Graham wrote: »

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett doesn't appear to be quite as sure as you.

In response to a question posed by Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J

to be fair I dont think anybody is sure whether Trump can pardon himself. It has never come up before. Of course he could just resign the day before his term ends and let Pence pardon him.

namloc1980

Nice to see the President focusing on the issues that matter.

.

MoonUnit75

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

actually I posted that on this thread. are you calling me an idiot?

I called the person who tweeted it an idiot, are you the one who tweeted it?

Graham

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

to be fair I dont think anybody is sure whether Trump can pardon himself. It has never come up before. Of course he could just resign the day before his term ends and let Pence pardon him.

It's been a bizarre 4 years.

It's a sad indictment of the Presidency that it's even being discussed never mind that its being discussed with Supreme Court Nominees.